To tolerate, or not to tolerate, that is the question.
Well, yes it is a question. To tolerate means, in this sense, to endure and put up with someone/something (unhappily.) In effect, “I don’t like (it, you, them, etc., ) but I won’t (can’t) waste anymore of my time fussing with (it, you, them, etc., ) Toleration is a quantum improvement over attacking, fighting, resisting, against anything that displeases you, or is not aligned with your usual way of thinking (a.k.a. belief.)
It’s axiomatic that anything someone wants and does is rooted in an expectation that he/she will feel better for having it. There’s nothing complicated about this. How often have you had the thought “I’d be better off if only (it, you, them, etc.) would ________ (fill in the blank.) There’s a contradiction at play that cancels the desired good feeling – the focus on the mischief/mis-deed/whatever about (it, you, them, etc.,). Just as two physical objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time, it’s not possible for a good feeling and a negative (bad) feeling to occupy the same attention at the same time. Thus the problem with toleration.
There is a strata of perspective a notch above toleration. It’s called Allowing. Someone eaten up with resentment may, in a moment of frustration, comprehend the concept of toleration or forgiveness. It’s unlikely, however, they could grasp a concept of allowing at that moment. Someone who has developed the ability to tolerate (it, you, them, etc., ) may be able to catch a glimpse of allowing.
The difference between the two is subtle yet vast. Very similar to the subtle yet vast difference between a thought of that which is hateful to yourself do not unto another and do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Toleration carries with it the idea, the memory, the picture of whatever it is about (it, you, them, etc., ) that offends/angers you. Allowing is free of that burden and (it, you, them, etc., ) are allowed to be what/who they are – sans judgment.
It’s the without judgment part that blocks access to this level of thought for many people. Allowing and judging cannot occupy the same mind at the same time. To judge is to seek and find fault, however defined. The solution is for the judged to correct the “fault.” For instance, in New York city there’s a ruckus over newborns having formula for food. Who decides if a newborn is breast fed or bottle? In this spat the judgment is from the state (city government) to force the mothers to breast feed by making formula very difficult to access in a city hospital. Is this justice? It is judgment.
So, the value of any judgment is relative to who/what is judging and who/what is judged. Floating just above that clamor is the old adage live and let live, which is an application of Allowing.
The subtle difference between tolerance and allowing is very similar to the distinction between being grateful for something and appreciating something.
The bottom line is that too many people deprive themselves of joy simply by the manner of their thinking.